In case of Milan, or when ever a nation has cores. The peace deal will always suggest you give that core to the nations UNLESS you occupy it. Therefore you don't need to wait until it is occupied too peace out. Hope that helps and you guys enjoyed this video!
Is there any possibility that the greates jame of all time gets uploaded to youtube? I was in the middle of the PU war with Milan but now I cant find the video on twitch anymore... Love your stuff btw
You can often promise Ottomans Naples’ land, give him all his vital interest, and he wouldn’t even want to take even one of them! This means you are free to take everything else in the war for yourself.
No one has made a Navarre guide since 1.30 came out and blew up the old meta because an alliance with France is now impossible. This gives a good idea of how to get a good start, thanks
@@flimpeenflarmpoon1353 because France already starts with max or slightly above number of diplo relations making getting an alliance become more negative
@@Crick1952 you don't want to PU aragon. You want the state of Aragon to get permanent claims on all of Iberia so you can fight Portugal without no CB and then fight Castile. Also when I did it I took Aragon state and released Valencia and Catalonia to reconquest the rest of Aragon.
Wow that explains a lot. this happen to me unintentionally a lot playing with England in the hundred year war when I call both Castile or Aragon in and sometime they don't mind if I don't give them land when I promise them land. finally I understand why sometime the ai just don't want land I thought it was a bug or something .thank you this it is a great help.
Glad to see someone explaining how this works, thanks! I used this without my knowledge in my Knights run. Venice has lots of disjointed provinces, so the AI gets confused over their priorities, and they end up not losing trust even if you give them nothing.
Nice one. Very useful with Byzantium calling The Knights in war against Ottoblob. Btw, those provinces mentioned in 10:30 and later would not be overseas for Castille, it's the same continent. Just would be considered as a provinces without land connection to the capitol ;)
It's really useful, if you get called to war by an ally, and happen to have vital interest on provinces of one of the enemy war participants, AI may give you some of the land you want as a part of their peace deal. I've been called a lot into war against HRE members by Hungary and GB, and I got 5 highly developed Provence provinces across two wars. I don't know how they decide whether to give it or not, but I usually just siege all forts, and they're happy
remember that for landlocked nodes, like kazan, pest, krakow and so on, every merchant present will have caravan power added to the 10% trade power from downstream node. Thats why german minors summed up pull so much from these poland, hungary and austria. Caravan power is 1/3 of total dev from the nation that placed a tranfering merchant. HRE has a lot of dev, so that means a lot of trade power. Hard to make those landlocked nodes pseudo end nodes.
I am a rather basic and casual player with almost 700h but id like to deepen my understanding of mana priority; what is truly important and what can wait, so that i could stop some friends of mine im trying to drag into the game from falling behind and getting discouraged. As adm, dip and mil powers are relevant to all kinds of growth in the nation id love to see your take on what a lower experience player should focus on to match the "omnipotent" and "scientifically unbeatable" AI in military and economy.
Exploiting is like that custom nations bug. I used that one because you either A. Get an immortal ruler while the rest of your nation had terrible ideas, weak government and bad technology group. Or B. Your nation has fantastic ideas, powerful government and good tech group. Paradox should really just have added a 100 stat man run where you cannot get achievements but can create your OP nation to your wildest dreams
There is a bit of a grey area though. For example, some people consider dip banking an exploit, but canceling culture conversions is a game mechanic as well.
Another way to achieve a similar result (but is much more situational) is to out-wait your ally until they separate peace. This is most likely if your ally is on a different battlefront than you and is of comparable strength, and the enemy AI targets them first to knock them out of the war. For example, you might call in the Mamluks as a European nation vs the Ottomans, and while you're besieging the Ottomans they occupy Mamluk territory until they fold. Then, with your ally out of the war, you can peace and take everything for yourself.
I ran into this on a Manchu run. I had a disastrous war when I didn't have my army where I wanted them and I got stack whipped by Japan. In the peace deal I preferred them to take my cost thinking I could get reconquista. Turned out the AI didn't want it. Or couldn't take it.
It's really nice to see you've taken a step back to do some more normal-level content. It's been real sad to see you suffer through all these insane no-exploit one-culture Roman runs which would inevitably fail due to some dumb RNG after weeks of effort. You're still the best EU4 player there is, you don't have to keep proving it to us!
Castille doesn't take provinces not only because there is no land bridge but also no other provinces shares same coastline (or sea province if you want) if they shared it pretty likely Castille will take at least one
This video is a case of "I sorta knew this but didn't know the specifics until now" Since I knew there was a way to use a promise land war declaration while giving no land and it being ok, but didn't know about the specifics like them needing to take the land they wanted that they can't get and the whole thing about the colonial ruler, so very nice video.
I would consider it an exploit as you promised land and did not fulfil that promise even thought the ally pulled a lot of the weight. It is very understandable and reasonable why it happens and why the AI does not want the land, but when you take a step back at the end of the day you are getting an AI to do your dirty work for nothing in return. I wouldn't personally use it, mostly because I like to imagine my campaigns happen in some alternate history, and if you promised territory in a real war and then didn't fulfil that promise when the ally pulled a lot of the weight, there is no way that ally wouldn't be outraged. If I could somehow justify it like, "the ally was a detriment to our side" I understand swindling them out of territory but they rarely are a detriment.
In this case, would it have been possible to vital interest everything except urgell instead? So there would be no risk whatsoever of him wanting an overseas colony
Can you make a video on choosing provinces to push institutions in? Is a low dev cost procince better than a province that has better cost modifiers but has already been devved?
@@andrewmcallister9908 declare war, have at least 1 ally, open macro builder, open tab call to war, click on a green land with left mouse, promise land and there you have it. you dont have this option always but countries that are rivaled, want land and have no truth will most likely be available. but keep in mind that if you dont give them land you cant call for land in other wars for quite a while.
As someone else has said, this is cheese and not an exploit. If it were an exploit, then there would not be game rules around contested provinces of vital interest. Effectively this is due to AI design flaws (it will not demand a vital-interest province from a war ally), and not a flaw in game implementation (i.e. a glitch).
I mean we're playing very loose with the terms and i can bet my balls no two people will give me the same definitions of cheese and exploit. What we should agree on is this is completely nonsensical logic on part of the ai that should be fixed, whether you wanna call it exploiting the ai or just beating it.
@@MrNoobthenub Yeah, that's why I qualified that it was a design oversight in the AI rather than an actual bug. Either way it should be fixed, but Paradox will never fix the AI... (hopefully I jinxed it and now they will fix it :DDDD) Certainly not until EUV
I think the speedrunnering community make a good distinction between glitches and exploits. Exploits simply make use of intented game mechanics in a creative or unintented ways, while glitches make use of unintended game mechanics.
Thats very intresting :) Seems lika an exploit with cancelling vyour vassal in a pease when you are at 100% annexation. It`s lower AE, but you will annex vassal. But talking about exploits call to war anyone who rival with you enemy is broken thing :)
"This is not an exploit let me explain" 2 seconds later "we are exploiting a game mechanic" lmao dude, it's an exploit. You promised him land, didn't give him the land, and avoided the penalty with this exploit.
He was not exploiting anything, It was designed so that the player has the choice to break the promise. If you break the promise; castille with a militaristic leader will turn on you as soon as the truce ends.
I have no idea how this is not an exploit. You're literally cheesing a mechanic. Promise land is supposed to make it easier for another nation to help you, but you must give them something they want, or they will be mad at you. If you can NOT give them what they want, and they still aren't mad at you, you've cheesed the mechanic, nullifying it. That seems like textbook exploit to me.
It is not and exploit because it is impossible to avoid. When you do it and do not even notice that you are doing it because it is impossible to avoid. = no exploit because you don't know you are doing it. Understanding how the game works = exploit. Ignorance is bliss.
@@BudgetMonk l don't think I've ever done it. I didn't know you could do it until this video. I understand your reasoning, I just don't agree that you "can't avoid doing it"
"i'm not an exploit player" lol just be honest with yourself at least. you're promising land with no intention of giving it and the AI is too stupid to punish or even reckognize your lie. pure exploit.
Now that you mentioned it, do you consider the "black flag condottieri" an exploit? Specifically the one where you use the return province to intentionally black flag one of your armies so you can rent it to almost any country disregarding military access?
I have to disagree on it not being exploiting, and how it relates to intention. These bot players are bots, but they are meant to represent people in the simulated era. If you promise something to a person, then don't deliver, they get pissed off. If your lawyer shows them a piece of paper that says they shouldn't be pissed off, that pisses them off more. That's basically what you're doing here. Obviously I'm not an authority on the matter, only those who work at Paradox are, but to me this looks like exploiting.
i mean, this isn't an exploit, this is both countries going "right, so we both want these provinces, oh, you took some now i can't administrate those others i want, well i guess you'll pay me back later with the favors you give me from not taking any land", which would be a valid real life tactic with the risk of betrayal so many real alliances had. Only thing different is that the AI by virtue of having it's attention span divvied up into 200 to run every country isn't very good at detecting cons.
Firstly, the in game representation of "ability to administrate" is "ability to core" and the ai is clearly not understanding that in this case. Castille would still think valencia is too "overseas" for it while it is establishing colonies on cuba. The logic is broken and is being exploited Secondly, what happened here was navarra going "i am going to take some of the provinces that we both want, and the rest of them i will just give them back to our enemy instead of you". This is a standard ai logic circus dunno why people wanna make sense of it so hard.
![Why So Few People Have This AWFUL Achievement [EU4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a9KwKLGJEJ4/mqdefault.jpg)
In case of Milan, or when ever a nation has cores. The peace deal will always suggest you give that core to the nations UNLESS you occupy it. Therefore you don't need to wait until it is occupied too peace out. Hope that helps and you guys enjoyed this video!
Is there any possibility that the greates jame of all time gets uploaded to youtube? I was in the middle of the PU war with Milan but now I cant find the video on twitch anymore... Love your stuff btw
we r going to get so 5 head as Monk go through this series!
"9 times out of 10 this is gonna work every time" makes sense xD
Haha It works every time provided that all the conditions are met before and during (the peace deal) the war. xD
60% of the time, it works every time
@@samuelhiatt9338 I see you are a man of culture as well
You can often promise Ottomans Naples’ land, give him all his vital interest, and he wouldn’t even want to take even one of them! This means you are free to take everything else in the war for yourself.
The non exiled in allied lands was something I did not know even with 3000+ hours thanks
The classic French invasion of England from Scotland.
But it only works if your ally joins the war if I am not mistaken.
@@lukasbosina301 nope, even works if they don't
I have been doing this accidentaly, but knowing how to do this helps a ton. Thanks!
Yeah same. Never understood why sometimes the ai dosen’t want land. Good to know indeed
oh, so thats how it works, I've done this so many times without knowing why or how it happends, but always happy it did
No one has made a Navarre guide since 1.30 came out and blew up the old meta because an alliance with France is now impossible.
This gives a good idea of how to get a good start, thanks
How is a France alliance not possible? I got eng, fra and cas on VH. You just need to become aragons subject and you can ally his rivals.
@@flimpeenflarmpoon1353 because France already starts with max or slightly above number of diplo relations making getting an alliance become more negative
@@flimpeenflarmpoon1353 Doesn't that nullify the PU CB you get on Aragon within the first few years after King Juan dies?
@@Crick1952 you don't want to PU aragon. You want the state of Aragon to get permanent claims on all of Iberia so you can fight Portugal without no CB and then fight Castile. Also when I did it I took Aragon state and released Valencia and Catalonia to reconquest the rest of Aragon.
Nice video Monk! A video on when/how to use trade companies to boost production would be cool
Wow that explains a lot. this happen to me unintentionally a lot playing with England in the hundred year war when I call both Castile or Aragon in and sometime they don't mind if I don't give them land when I promise them land. finally I understand why sometime the ai just don't want land I thought it was a bug or something .thank you this it is a great help.
Glad to see someone explaining how this works, thanks! I used this without my knowledge in my Knights run. Venice has lots of disjointed provinces, so the AI gets confused over their priorities, and they end up not losing trust even if you give them nothing.
Nice one. Very useful with Byzantium calling The Knights in war against Ottoblob.
Btw, those provinces mentioned in 10:30 and later would not be overseas for Castille, it's the same continent. Just would be considered as a provinces without land connection to the capitol ;)
Well I believe that in EU4 “overseas provinces” means provinces not accessible by land or in the same sea tile as a province you already have cored
@@andy-em5tp that is not true, is has to be also on the subcontinent other than yoyr capitol
That's a game changer for me. Very nice content!
Great video, the music is a nice touch!
*incoming trade offer from player!*
I receive your land.
You receive nothing.
Great content im glad you are making produced content again. Always have enjoyed your guides and vids on youtube
glad to see you on youtube again :)
Wow, didn't know you could do that ! Thanks for the tutorial !
loving your work
I never used the vital interests setting - now I might start doing that...
It's really useful, if you get called to war by an ally, and happen to have vital interest on provinces of one of the enemy war participants, AI may give you some of the land you want as a part of their peace deal. I've been called a lot into war against HRE members by Hungary and GB, and I got 5 highly developed Provence provinces across two wars. I don't know how they decide whether to give it or not, but I usually just siege all forts, and they're happy
remember that for landlocked nodes, like kazan, pest, krakow and so on, every merchant present will have caravan power added to the 10% trade power from downstream node. Thats why german minors summed up pull so much from these poland, hungary and austria. Caravan power is 1/3 of total dev from the nation that placed a tranfering merchant. HRE has a lot of dev, so that means a lot of trade power. Hard to make those landlocked nodes pseudo end nodes.
Great to see you back on TH-cam B-monk
I am a rather basic and casual player with almost 700h but id like to deepen my understanding of mana priority; what is truly important and what can wait, so that i could stop some friends of mine im trying to drag into the game from falling behind and getting discouraged. As adm, dip and mil powers are relevant to all kinds of growth in the nation id love to see your take on what a lower experience player should focus on to match the "omnipotent" and "scientifically unbeatable" AI in military and economy.
Cheese is not exploiting
You cheese the promise land mechanic
Not exploit it.
Exploiting is like that custom nations bug.
I used that one because you either
A. Get an immortal ruler while the rest of your nation had terrible ideas, weak government and bad technology group.
Or
B. Your nation has fantastic ideas, powerful government and good tech group.
Paradox should really just have added a 100 stat man run where you cannot get achievements but can create your OP nation to your wildest dreams
There is a bit of a grey area though. For example, some people consider dip banking an exploit, but canceling culture conversions is a game mechanic as well.
@@sjoerdo6988 you do have a point I'm saying there's a difference
There can be overlap and a diffence.
@@MrDwarfpitcher custom nation glitches are fucking cringe. Stop cheating and play the damn game.
that diplomatic feedback does not exist for me
oh yea I found that by accident but never managed to replicate, thank you
Glad to see you on youtube again
Another way to achieve a similar result (but is much more situational) is to out-wait your ally until they separate peace.
This is most likely if your ally is on a different battlefront than you and is of comparable strength, and the enemy AI targets them first to knock them out of the war. For example, you might call in the Mamluks as a European nation vs the Ottomans, and while you're besieging the Ottomans they occupy Mamluk territory until they fold. Then, with your ally out of the war, you can peace and take everything for yourself.
Who is this Monk, lads?!
Thoroughly enjoyed this. Though to you, this might not be a high-level strategy, but for me it is. Keep going Monk!
Thanks Vinston
I ran into this on a Manchu run. I had a disastrous war when I didn't have my army where I wanted them and I got stack whipped by Japan. In the peace deal I preferred them to take my cost thinking I could get reconquista.
Turned out the AI didn't want it. Or couldn't take it.
Europa-friendly upload times I guess :D
Great to see you here again :)
It's really nice to see you've taken a step back to do some more normal-level content. It's been real sad to see you suffer through all these insane no-exploit one-culture Roman runs which would inevitably fail due to some dumb RNG after weeks of effort. You're still the best EU4 player there is, you don't have to keep proving it to us!
I don't have DLCs I can't do this :-(((
That monk guy knows his stuff
Castille doesn't take provinces not only because there is no land bridge but also no other provinces shares same coastline (or sea province if you want) if they shared it pretty likely Castille will take at least one
This video is a case of "I sorta knew this but didn't know the specifics until now"
Since I knew there was a way to use a promise land war declaration while giving no land and it being ok, but didn't know about the specifics like them needing to take the land they wanted that they can't get and the whole thing about the colonial ruler, so very nice video.
Ooooh so it's because there's no land connection to capital, i see
Ah yes, Aragin.
Love your videos.
Can we get a universal starting guide and early strategy please?
I would consider it an exploit as you promised land and did not fulfil that promise even thought the ally pulled a lot of the weight. It is very understandable and reasonable why it happens and why the AI does not want the land, but when you take a step back at the end of the day you are getting an AI to do your dirty work for nothing in return. I wouldn't personally use it, mostly because I like to imagine my campaigns happen in some alternate history, and if you promised territory in a real war and then didn't fulfil that promise when the ally pulled a lot of the weight, there is no way that ally wouldn't be outraged. If I could somehow justify it like, "the ally was a detriment to our side" I understand swindling them out of territory but they rarely are a detriment.
I'm a new player and I love this!
This is not an exploit. Is a diplomatic manoeuvre
i remembe when you played navara, you suffered so much. like the video tho :D
Go Go Monk sama
never done this before, though it doe feel like an exploit that castille wouldn't want any of the other strategic lands that they occupy.
In this case, would it have been possible to vital interest everything except urgell instead? So there would be no risk whatsoever of him wanting an overseas colony
@@andrewmcallister9908 I meant an overseas province, monk calls them colonies.
Legit. Been doing this myself for ages. Bit gamey, but not an exploit.
You should get a cb if you don't get land, only a trust hit is too soft
Can you make a video on choosing provinces to push institutions in? Is a low dev cost procince better than a province that has better cost modifiers but has already been devved?
2k hours and still learning new stuff! Anyone else? xD
700h and i dont think i know how armies move.
This series is great! I feel like you repeat yourself a lot during the video though
This is a cool guide, this is a mechanic I've been playing around but I wasn't exactly aware of how I was pulling it off. Thanks for this series
Bruh, aragon always gets too many allies and my little stacks always get stack wiped, how is playing on very hard easier than normal???
music is too loud
@budgetmonk Have you seen the exploit by ludiethistory where you can invite non allies into war?
@@andrewmcallister9908 declare war, have at least 1 ally, open macro builder, open tab call to war, click on a green land with left mouse, promise land and there you have it. you dont have this option always but countries that are rivaled, want land and have no truth will most likely be available. but keep in mind that if you dont give them land you cant call for land in other wars for quite a while.
Yesman is goood to win to
u dont need to occuppy those just mark all lands which it wants and occupy provinces wihch u want it wont get mad
Turn your music way down man or don't even have any we appreciate you for you and your lovely voice is enough
Are you supposed to still get the recently broke promise malus or am I missing something?
As someone else has said, this is cheese and not an exploit. If it were an exploit, then there would not be game rules around contested provinces of vital interest. Effectively this is due to AI design flaws (it will not demand a vital-interest province from a war ally), and not a flaw in game implementation (i.e. a glitch).
I mean we're playing very loose with the terms and i can bet my balls no two people will give me the same definitions of cheese and exploit. What we should agree on is this is completely nonsensical logic on part of the ai that should be fixed, whether you wanna call it exploiting the ai or just beating it.
@@MrNoobthenub Yeah, that's why I qualified that it was a design oversight in the AI rather than an actual bug. Either way it should be fixed, but Paradox will never fix the AI... (hopefully I jinxed it and now they will fix it :DDDD)
Certainly not until EUV
I really liked your Vidoeo, but could you turn down the music a little for your next one?
Based
I think the speedrunnering community make a good distinction between glitches and exploits. Exploits simply make use of intented game mechanics in a creative or unintented ways, while glitches make use of unintended game mechanics.
Please in the future, music ***much*** less loud, voice louder. :) thank you!
Thats very intresting :) Seems lika an exploit with cancelling vyour vassal in a pease when you are at 100% annexation. It`s lower AE, but you will annex vassal. But talking about exploits call to war anyone who rival with you enemy is broken thing :)
"This is not an exploit let me explain" 2 seconds later "we are exploiting a game mechanic"
lmao dude, it's an exploit. You promised him land, didn't give him the land, and avoided the penalty with this exploit.
He was not exploiting anything, It was designed so that the player has the choice to break the promise. If you break the promise; castille with a militaristic leader will turn on you as soon as the truce ends.
The music is a bit too loud compared to your voice
How to get free promised land-
Step 1: Don't have the Cossacks DLC
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!!!!!!!
SCAMED omegalul
I have no idea how this is not an exploit.
You're literally cheesing a mechanic. Promise land is supposed to make it easier for another nation to help you, but you must give them something they want, or they will be mad at you. If you can NOT give them what they want, and they still aren't mad at you, you've cheesed the mechanic, nullifying it.
That seems like textbook exploit to me.
I'm saying using exploits is bad or wrong, I do it all the time.
But I'm happy to admit that.
I'm not trying to rules lawyer to justify my actions.
I'm sorry, saying "It's not an exploit because it's not a game breaking exploit" doesn't make sense to me.
It is not and exploit because it is impossible to avoid. When you do it and do not even notice that you are doing it because it is impossible to avoid. = no exploit because you don't know you are doing it.
Understanding how the game works = exploit. Ignorance is bliss.
@@BudgetMonk l don't think I've ever done it.
I didn't know you could do it until this video.
I understand your reasoning, I just don't agree that you "can't avoid doing it"
KKona 7 Howdy
'I dont use exploits'
'I exploit game mechanics'
hmmm ok
"i'm not an exploit player" lol just be honest with yourself at least. you're promising land with no intention of giving it and the AI is too stupid to punish or even reckognize your lie. pure exploit.
Now that you mentioned it, do you consider the "black flag condottieri" an exploit? Specifically the one where you use the return province to intentionally black flag one of your armies so you can rent it to almost any country disregarding military access?
I'm not sure I'd even call it flawed game design; it's working as intended, at least until the devs intend otherwise.
I have to disagree on it not being exploiting, and how it relates to intention. These bot players are bots, but they are meant to represent people in the simulated era. If you promise something to a person, then don't deliver, they get pissed off. If your lawyer shows them a piece of paper that says they shouldn't be pissed off, that pisses them off more. That's basically what you're doing here. Obviously I'm not an authority on the matter, only those who work at Paradox are, but to me this looks like exploiting.
30 minutes explaining why is not an exploit. Show the goddamn exploit already!
100% an exploit.
i mean, this isn't an exploit, this is both countries going "right, so we both want these provinces, oh, you took some now i can't administrate those others i want, well i guess you'll pay me back later with the favors you give me from not taking any land", which would be a valid real life tactic with the risk of betrayal so many real alliances had. Only thing different is that the AI by virtue of having it's attention span divvied up into 200 to run every country isn't very good at detecting cons.
Firstly, the in game representation of "ability to administrate" is "ability to core" and the ai is clearly not understanding that in this case. Castille would still think valencia is too "overseas" for it while it is establishing colonies on cuba. The logic is broken and is being exploited
Secondly, what happened here was navarra going "i am going to take some of the provinces that we both want, and the rest of them i will just give them back to our enemy instead of you". This is a standard ai logic circus dunno why people wanna make sense of it so hard.